Maybe if the Energy-East pipeline did not get cancelled and Quebec paid their own bills, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. In my opinion, I don’t think any politician (including Carney) can clean up this mess.
"Most of the energy of political work is devoted to correcting the effects of mismanagement of government."
Hey Brian if you wonder why the GG was so quickly appointed, take some time and listen to RichDoesPolitics on the future of Canada under her. And if you or your audience don’t then don’t come on when the Emergancy Act is used again and know who is really behind Canada downfall. If you love your families, especially your kids you will listen if not, oh well you have been told. If you choose to just sit by, no complaints from anyone. This appointment and all the corrupt things going on, and most don’t know a quarter of it , will be the end of the Canada you know. And all these TDS Canadians out there, you have no idea he is trying to save Canada from this corrupt crown.
Trump is mostly falling asleep in cabinet meeting and sending out deranged posts in the middle of the night. That is when he isn’t taking bribes and stealing money from the American people. But yah, this guy is “saving us”. Lol.
I'll answer the second class citizen question. Of course, Albertans don't consider themselves second class citizens. But a lot of the mad cow addled elbows up Liberal Toronto baby boomers consider them second class citizens. Talk about a spectacular lack of self-awareness. People literally pay money to drive around the city.
Brian, you have for some considerable time said that you understand that we in Alberta have grievances. What you haven't said/done/commented upon is what the path forward is for dealing with those grievances.
You could assert that we should stay in Canada and lobby for change. I would then ask you for how long should do that? We have been lobbying for change for many decades; for example, you may recall Preston Manning and the Reform Party's slogan of "The West Wants In!" from the 1990s. Certainly that didn't work - why should we expect it to work now?
You could assert that we should simply elect Liberals and be part of the government. I would counter by asking how is it democratic that only those who support the winning party actually have their issues addressed and why should the winning party be able to disadvantage that part of the country that did not support the winning party?
You could assert that we should vote clearly on certain issues to indicate our desires, quite apart from actual electoral politics. I would then point out that in 2021 Alberta voted to eliminate equalization from the constitution and the prime minister of the day, the Face Painter, simply dismissed that referendum result and said that he/they would not even discuss it.
You might point to the Senate as representing we in the hinterlands. After I finished laughing I would point out that we in Alberta have elected a number of "Senators in Waiting" through province wide elections and the various Prime Ministers of the day have ignored our democratic will.
So, I ask you, Brian, just what is it that we should do to bring our issues to the fore and expect a different result, nay, any result other than dismissiveness? If you cannot recommend something that has already been tried and failed then you will end up as am I: an Alberta separatist.
I am a 10th generation French Canadian(a Marceau) whose family settled in the Île d'Orléans, Quebec area in 1665. Whenever the whiners fire up the separation issue, I say, don't let the door hit you on the way out. It would be terrible if Alberta left because I actually appreciate what they bring to the country but I totally get it and wish them luck. Most of rural Ontario would love to join them if we could separate from the ridiculous overrated city of Toronto(sorry Brian). So glad I got out and if I never go east of Brantford the rest of my life, I will be delighted. Most of Keith's complaints really relate to Toronto.
Martin, I am an Albertan and therefore cannot pretend to comment on Quebec's circumstances; I have certainly been to Quebec and enjoyed my time there but that is not at all the same as living there. As it happens, I am an Alberta separatist and have been for pretty much my whole life (I am now 75); I understand the words used by the Quebec separatists (well, the English words for I am not bilingual) but I simply don't understand the nuances; that is your job as Quebec is in your blood as Alberta is in my blood.
From your perspective as a Quebec federalist - if I may be so presumptuous as to call you that - I would be very appreciative if you could provide me some perspective about Alberta. I state that I am an Alberta separatist and I am aware that many folks in ROC oppose Alberta leaving. My problem with their position is that when I ask what, just what, would we lose be leaving is that I get answers that are emotional or naive or just uninformed. Mr. Lilley's interview with Keith Wilson inclues interesting examples of some of the comments that we separatists hear.
So, my question of you, given that you are a Quebec federalist, what would we in Alberta lose by leaving Canada? I have a pretty good idea of what we would gain but, as near as I can tell, I just don't see a great deal that we would lose, hence, my request of you.
It appears that little Mark and his ilk have once again confirmed the validity of The Peter Principle. A major reason why separation is so popular in the west.
When CSIS, the CIA and other prominent national security personalities tell him not to trust Communist China he keeps pushing us towards a political disaster (thebureau@substack.com 2026/05/11).
It's past time for Mark to give his head a shake and bring back common sense, calling a federal election would be a good start.
The Fraser Institute's main economic forecasts and analyses for Canada center on several key themes of concern and projection for 2026 is a good indicator of why the west wants out.:
Sluggish Growth and High Unemployment: The Canadian economy is expected to grow by 1.7% in 2025, but the job market has weakened, with the unemployment rate projected to average almost 7%, a significant increase from 5.4% two years prior. Employment growth is expected to remain muted in 2026.
Chronic Underinvestment: A major long-term concern is Canada's persistent underperformance in business investment. Adjusted for inflation, private-sector capital spending has been declining for a decade, widening the gap with the United States. This lack of investment in tools, equipment, and technology is a primary reason for lackluster productivity growth, which in turn limits wage increases.
Impact of Trade Uncertainty: The economic outlook is heavily influenced by uncertainty surrounding the Canada-U.S. trade relationship. While Canada has been exempted from most U.S. tariffs so far, the threat of tariffs on key sectors like steel, aluminum, lumber, and autos continues to weigh on business investment and exports.
Future Policy Focus: The Institute emphasizes that improving the business environment is crucial for 2026. This includes getting clarity on the future of the Canada-U.S. trade relationship and implementing tax and regulatory policies that make Canada a more attractive destination for investment and growth.
Why would Alberta separating break up Canada? Is it because Alberta ,and to a lesser extent Saskatchewan,fund eastern Canada. Is it because Alberta fund s Ontario to the tune of hundreds of millions or Quebec to the tune of 30 billion to fund day care while parents in Alberta cant afford it?
Fred, you're asking the right question, but let me give you an answer that goes deeper than transfer payments.
Alberta separating would break up Canada for reasons that have nothing to do with who funds whose daycare. It's about geography and resources—specifically, what happens to Alberta's oil the day after independence.
The Prairie Knot
Every barrel of Alberta oil that reaches a customer crosses Saskatchewan. The Enbridge Mainline. The Keystone network. The TransCanada natural gas system. All of it runs through Saskatchewan soil. Inside Confederation, that's invisible—no border checks, no transit fees, seamless flow.
Outside Confederation? Saskatchewan becomes a sovereign nation sitting directly between Alberta's oil and every customer Alberta has. Sovereign nations charge transit fees. Russia charges Europe. Turkey charges everyone. Ukraine collected billions from Russian gas before the war.
If Alberta leaves, Saskatchewan can charge whatever the market will bear. A modest $5 per barrel on the oil that crosses our territory means billions annually flowing from Alberta's treasury to Saskatchewan's. And Alberta has no alternative route that doesn't cross someone else's sovereign territory.
That's not a threat. That's geography.
The Diluent Problem
Alberta's oil sands produce bitumen—thick as cold molasses. It won't flow through a pipeline without being mixed with lighter oil called diluent. A huge portion of that diluent comes from Saskatchewan's Bakken formation.
Inside Confederation, that diluent flows freely at market prices. Outside Confederation, Saskatchewan has zero obligation to sell it to Alberta. We could charge a premium. We could sell it to the Americans instead. Without reliable, affordable diluent, the oil sands literally cannot move their product.
But Here's the Part You Need to Hear
This isn't a Saskatchewan victory lap. The knife cuts both ways.
Saskatchewan's potash, grain, and oil reach Asian markets through the Port of Vancouver. Every rail line to tidewater crosses Alberta. If Alberta separates, every train of Saskatchewan potash pays an Albertan transit fee. Every shipment of grain needs Alberta's permission to cross.
Saskatchewan also doesn't touch tidewater. We have Churchill, Manitoba, for part of the year. The Arctic Bridge could eventually give us year-round access. But that infrastructure isn't fully built yet. Today, our exports reach the world by crossing Alberta to the west, Manitoba to the east, or the United States to the south. Every route crosses a border. Outside Confederation, every border is a tollbooth.
And a big chunk of Saskatchewan crude is processed in Alberta's refineries, which are configured to handle our light crude blended with their heavy bitumen. If those refineries become foreign facilities, Saskatchewan faces the multi-billion dollar cost of building our own—or selling our oil at a discount for years.
The Real Answer to Your Question
Alberta leaving would break up Canada not because of transfer payments, but because the Prairie economy is one machine, not two separate engines. Alberta's oil won't flow without Saskatchewan's territory. Saskatchewan's exports won't reach port without Alberta's railways. Alberta's bitumen won't move without Saskatchewan's diluent. Saskatchewan's crude won't get refined without Alberta's upgraders.
Pull one province out, and the whole machine seizes up. Both provinces bleed. Both lose billions. Both end up poorer, weaker, and alone at exactly the moment the world is consolidating into trade blocs that punish small, isolated economies.
What We Should Do Instead
The three Prairie provinces should stop fighting each other and start recognizing that together, we hold leverage no single province holds alone. Saskatchewan has the resources the world cannot replace—uranium, potash, rare earths, helium. Alberta has the energy and the capital. Manitoba has the port, the hydro power, and the geographic position.
Together, we're a resource superpower. Separately, we're three small economies easily picked off by Washington, Beijing, or Brussels.
The $30 billion daycare debate you mentioned? That's pennies compared to what we'd lose if the Prairie Knot unravels. Let's negotiate better terms inside Confederation—together—rather than destroying the only arrangement that prevents us from charging each other into bankruptcy.
There ares structural problems with the rights of the western Canadian provinces that require all provinces to support in order to address. Ontario and Quebec dominate and will never willingly give up any of their advantages.
Thanks for the great interview. I was getting a little tired of your "what about ..." questions, but Keith handled them well. I think Keith made two very important points.
1. Alberta is just different than BC and Eastern Canada. It is more than any specific policy or grievance.
2. The original BNA might have allowed the type of federalism that would allow Alberta to flourish inside Canada, but we have strayed so far from that and gotten so centralized that there is no set of policy changes that would help that would be agreed to by the federal government and other provinces to fix it.
As a non-Albertan, I would be sad to see them go, and worse off, but would wish them well if they make the decision.
Your guest made some very convincing arguments. I'm in rural southwestern Ontario, and I can tell you that the people who live around here are more like the Alberta folks than the people who seem to call the shots. Politics in Canada is so dominated by Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal that the rest of us get labelled right along with them. I don't see the issue so much as "West vs the rest", I see it more as the classic rural/urban divide. With the exception of the Maritimes; I can't figure out why those people are so slavishly devoted to the Liberal party.
One of the core parts of this is to achieve proper recognition and respect for everything Alberta does for the rest of the country. Alberta is the 21st century Ontario in that it is the economic driver of Canada and it donates (under threat and duress) massive amounts of its properly earned money to the rest of Canada (Quebec and the east) who then use it to hobble and criticize the core values and products that are in point of fact generating the money used to support the critics. I can only see two ways that Alberta will ever be respected for its hard work; either it separates, and it will do just fine as a separate country, or this forces the opening of the Constitution and a realignment of the Senate and House of Commons to reflect current Canada, including getting fully rid of the "transfer payments" which have long outlived their usefulness. There is no way that PEI, a tiny province of 160,000 people should have 4 Senators and 4 MPs. In 1867 it held some strategic position and there was no Canada west of "Upper Canada" so it had an arguably useful place. Today it is known for red sand and, to some people, spuds. Not much else. Yet it swings the heaviest hammer in Confederation. That needs to be fixed as does the same over representation of other provinces AND the Senate needs to be turned into something actually useful, not just another sink for Alberta's cash and a retirement perk for loyalists to which ever party happens to be in power in Ottawa. It's not at all hard to understand why Alberta NEEDS to vote to empower Danielle Smith up to and including separation as long as we have a Liberal Government in Ottawa that is wasting $billions and Alberta is not being listened to and give the things they are reasonably asking for.
A 'Yes' vote is Canada's last chance. A 'Yes' vote would probably require Constitutional reform. For one thing, Alberta gets only 6 Senators! That's crazy!
Bruce, the truth is that a "yes" vote by we in Alberta may be ROC's last chance but I cannot believe that they would be smart enough to seize that chance. Simply put, ROC is far too greedy, both economically and politically, to back off enough from the way that they have disadvantaged Alberta since our founding and they will not stop.
Hi Brian. As a western Canadian, your comment about disagreeing with your guest needs to be backed up with more information on what exactly you disagree with. When he said “we are different” in the west from eastern Canadians, I understand what he is saying. I assume you can’t relate to this comment either. Maybe next time if you are going to comment on whether you agree or disagree with someone you interview, you help your subscribers understand what is behind your stated judgements.
Maybe if the Energy-East pipeline did not get cancelled and Quebec paid their own bills, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. In my opinion, I don’t think any politician (including Carney) can clean up this mess.
"Most of the energy of political work is devoted to correcting the effects of mismanagement of government."
Milton Friedman
See above, you are exactly right.
Being from Toronto originally now living in Alberta for 32 years, and still going every year to visit family and hang out at the cottage
There is a fundamental difference between the West and East and especially Alberta
And the pure fing hatred and
abuse of Alberta from everyone but at the same time everyone sucking billions from this province and the Taxpayers is bloody criminal!!!
I am not aware of any other country in the world that does this to the most prosperous region of its Country !!!!
Alberta must separate just to prove a point to the rest of Canada and we will be as rich as Saudi Arabia
As a dedicated Alberta separatist of 75 years I appreciate fully your comments.
Muskoka?
Hey Brian if you wonder why the GG was so quickly appointed, take some time and listen to RichDoesPolitics on the future of Canada under her. And if you or your audience don’t then don’t come on when the Emergancy Act is used again and know who is really behind Canada downfall. If you love your families, especially your kids you will listen if not, oh well you have been told. If you choose to just sit by, no complaints from anyone. This appointment and all the corrupt things going on, and most don’t know a quarter of it , will be the end of the Canada you know. And all these TDS Canadians out there, you have no idea he is trying to save Canada from this corrupt crown.
Trump is trying to save us? Yeah, ok.
Its only because you have no clue what he is doing. Get off msm and broaden your onfo
Trump is mostly falling asleep in cabinet meeting and sending out deranged posts in the middle of the night. That is when he isn’t taking bribes and stealing money from the American people. But yah, this guy is “saving us”. Lol.
I'll answer the second class citizen question. Of course, Albertans don't consider themselves second class citizens. But a lot of the mad cow addled elbows up Liberal Toronto baby boomers consider them second class citizens. Talk about a spectacular lack of self-awareness. People literally pay money to drive around the city.
Brian, you have for some considerable time said that you understand that we in Alberta have grievances. What you haven't said/done/commented upon is what the path forward is for dealing with those grievances.
You could assert that we should stay in Canada and lobby for change. I would then ask you for how long should do that? We have been lobbying for change for many decades; for example, you may recall Preston Manning and the Reform Party's slogan of "The West Wants In!" from the 1990s. Certainly that didn't work - why should we expect it to work now?
You could assert that we should simply elect Liberals and be part of the government. I would counter by asking how is it democratic that only those who support the winning party actually have their issues addressed and why should the winning party be able to disadvantage that part of the country that did not support the winning party?
You could assert that we should vote clearly on certain issues to indicate our desires, quite apart from actual electoral politics. I would then point out that in 2021 Alberta voted to eliminate equalization from the constitution and the prime minister of the day, the Face Painter, simply dismissed that referendum result and said that he/they would not even discuss it.
You might point to the Senate as representing we in the hinterlands. After I finished laughing I would point out that we in Alberta have elected a number of "Senators in Waiting" through province wide elections and the various Prime Ministers of the day have ignored our democratic will.
So, I ask you, Brian, just what is it that we should do to bring our issues to the fore and expect a different result, nay, any result other than dismissiveness? If you cannot recommend something that has already been tried and failed then you will end up as am I: an Alberta separatist.
Every Canadian has grievance when our votes are overpowered by high density cities. No representation in government.
I am a 10th generation French Canadian(a Marceau) whose family settled in the Île d'Orléans, Quebec area in 1665. Whenever the whiners fire up the separation issue, I say, don't let the door hit you on the way out. It would be terrible if Alberta left because I actually appreciate what they bring to the country but I totally get it and wish them luck. Most of rural Ontario would love to join them if we could separate from the ridiculous overrated city of Toronto(sorry Brian). So glad I got out and if I never go east of Brantford the rest of my life, I will be delighted. Most of Keith's complaints really relate to Toronto.
Martin, I am an Albertan and therefore cannot pretend to comment on Quebec's circumstances; I have certainly been to Quebec and enjoyed my time there but that is not at all the same as living there. As it happens, I am an Alberta separatist and have been for pretty much my whole life (I am now 75); I understand the words used by the Quebec separatists (well, the English words for I am not bilingual) but I simply don't understand the nuances; that is your job as Quebec is in your blood as Alberta is in my blood.
From your perspective as a Quebec federalist - if I may be so presumptuous as to call you that - I would be very appreciative if you could provide me some perspective about Alberta. I state that I am an Alberta separatist and I am aware that many folks in ROC oppose Alberta leaving. My problem with their position is that when I ask what, just what, would we lose be leaving is that I get answers that are emotional or naive or just uninformed. Mr. Lilley's interview with Keith Wilson inclues interesting examples of some of the comments that we separatists hear.
So, my question of you, given that you are a Quebec federalist, what would we in Alberta lose by leaving Canada? I have a pretty good idea of what we would gain but, as near as I can tell, I just don't see a great deal that we would lose, hence, my request of you.
You could not be more correct in every aspect.
It appears that little Mark and his ilk have once again confirmed the validity of The Peter Principle. A major reason why separation is so popular in the west.
When CSIS, the CIA and other prominent national security personalities tell him not to trust Communist China he keeps pushing us towards a political disaster (thebureau@substack.com 2026/05/11).
It's past time for Mark to give his head a shake and bring back common sense, calling a federal election would be a good start.
The Fraser Institute's main economic forecasts and analyses for Canada center on several key themes of concern and projection for 2026 is a good indicator of why the west wants out.:
Sluggish Growth and High Unemployment: The Canadian economy is expected to grow by 1.7% in 2025, but the job market has weakened, with the unemployment rate projected to average almost 7%, a significant increase from 5.4% two years prior. Employment growth is expected to remain muted in 2026.
Chronic Underinvestment: A major long-term concern is Canada's persistent underperformance in business investment. Adjusted for inflation, private-sector capital spending has been declining for a decade, widening the gap with the United States. This lack of investment in tools, equipment, and technology is a primary reason for lackluster productivity growth, which in turn limits wage increases.
Impact of Trade Uncertainty: The economic outlook is heavily influenced by uncertainty surrounding the Canada-U.S. trade relationship. While Canada has been exempted from most U.S. tariffs so far, the threat of tariffs on key sectors like steel, aluminum, lumber, and autos continues to weigh on business investment and exports.
Future Policy Focus: The Institute emphasizes that improving the business environment is crucial for 2026. This includes getting clarity on the future of the Canada-U.S. trade relationship and implementing tax and regulatory policies that make Canada a more attractive destination for investment and growth.
Why would Alberta separating break up Canada? Is it because Alberta ,and to a lesser extent Saskatchewan,fund eastern Canada. Is it because Alberta fund s Ontario to the tune of hundreds of millions or Quebec to the tune of 30 billion to fund day care while parents in Alberta cant afford it?
Just wondering.
Fred
I'm not talking about separation, I am talking about a unified front to push for peace too.
The Prairie Key to Peace for Dummies
A Four-Part Guide to Understanding How Saskatchewan Can Help Stop Wars (Even If You've Never Thought About Any of This Before)
Part One: What the Hell Is the Prairie Key and Why Should I Care?
https://kellydwills55.substack.com/p/the-prairie-key-to-peace-for-dummies?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=r5v2
https://kellydwills55.substack.com/p/the-prairie-key-to-peace-for-dummies-27c?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=r5v2
https://kellydwills55.substack.com/p/the-prairie-key-to-peace-for-dummies-412?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=r5v2
https://kellydwills55.substack.com/p/the-prairie-key-to-peace-for-dummies-c71?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=r5v2
Fred, you're asking the right question, but let me give you an answer that goes deeper than transfer payments.
Alberta separating would break up Canada for reasons that have nothing to do with who funds whose daycare. It's about geography and resources—specifically, what happens to Alberta's oil the day after independence.
The Prairie Knot
Every barrel of Alberta oil that reaches a customer crosses Saskatchewan. The Enbridge Mainline. The Keystone network. The TransCanada natural gas system. All of it runs through Saskatchewan soil. Inside Confederation, that's invisible—no border checks, no transit fees, seamless flow.
Outside Confederation? Saskatchewan becomes a sovereign nation sitting directly between Alberta's oil and every customer Alberta has. Sovereign nations charge transit fees. Russia charges Europe. Turkey charges everyone. Ukraine collected billions from Russian gas before the war.
If Alberta leaves, Saskatchewan can charge whatever the market will bear. A modest $5 per barrel on the oil that crosses our territory means billions annually flowing from Alberta's treasury to Saskatchewan's. And Alberta has no alternative route that doesn't cross someone else's sovereign territory.
That's not a threat. That's geography.
The Diluent Problem
Alberta's oil sands produce bitumen—thick as cold molasses. It won't flow through a pipeline without being mixed with lighter oil called diluent. A huge portion of that diluent comes from Saskatchewan's Bakken formation.
Inside Confederation, that diluent flows freely at market prices. Outside Confederation, Saskatchewan has zero obligation to sell it to Alberta. We could charge a premium. We could sell it to the Americans instead. Without reliable, affordable diluent, the oil sands literally cannot move their product.
But Here's the Part You Need to Hear
This isn't a Saskatchewan victory lap. The knife cuts both ways.
Saskatchewan's potash, grain, and oil reach Asian markets through the Port of Vancouver. Every rail line to tidewater crosses Alberta. If Alberta separates, every train of Saskatchewan potash pays an Albertan transit fee. Every shipment of grain needs Alberta's permission to cross.
Saskatchewan also doesn't touch tidewater. We have Churchill, Manitoba, for part of the year. The Arctic Bridge could eventually give us year-round access. But that infrastructure isn't fully built yet. Today, our exports reach the world by crossing Alberta to the west, Manitoba to the east, or the United States to the south. Every route crosses a border. Outside Confederation, every border is a tollbooth.
And a big chunk of Saskatchewan crude is processed in Alberta's refineries, which are configured to handle our light crude blended with their heavy bitumen. If those refineries become foreign facilities, Saskatchewan faces the multi-billion dollar cost of building our own—or selling our oil at a discount for years.
The Real Answer to Your Question
Alberta leaving would break up Canada not because of transfer payments, but because the Prairie economy is one machine, not two separate engines. Alberta's oil won't flow without Saskatchewan's territory. Saskatchewan's exports won't reach port without Alberta's railways. Alberta's bitumen won't move without Saskatchewan's diluent. Saskatchewan's crude won't get refined without Alberta's upgraders.
Pull one province out, and the whole machine seizes up. Both provinces bleed. Both lose billions. Both end up poorer, weaker, and alone at exactly the moment the world is consolidating into trade blocs that punish small, isolated economies.
What We Should Do Instead
The three Prairie provinces should stop fighting each other and start recognizing that together, we hold leverage no single province holds alone. Saskatchewan has the resources the world cannot replace—uranium, potash, rare earths, helium. Alberta has the energy and the capital. Manitoba has the port, the hydro power, and the geographic position.
Together, we're a resource superpower. Separately, we're three small economies easily picked off by Washington, Beijing, or Brussels.
The $30 billion daycare debate you mentioned? That's pennies compared to what we'd lose if the Prairie Knot unravels. Let's negotiate better terms inside Confederation—together—rather than destroying the only arrangement that prevents us from charging each other into bankruptcy.
Premier Scott Moe: premier@gov.sk.ca | 306-787-9433
Premier Danielle Smith: premier@gov.ab.ca | 780-427-2251
Premier Wab Kinew: premier@manitoba.ca | 204-945-3714
Tell them to start acting like partners instead of rivals. The world isn't waiting for us to figure this out.
There ares structural problems with the rights of the western Canadian provinces that require all provinces to support in order to address. Ontario and Quebec dominate and will never willingly give up any of their advantages.
Unfortunately, that is exactly what would happen without a plan. What is the plan for the morning after? There is none.
Thanks for the great interview. I was getting a little tired of your "what about ..." questions, but Keith handled them well. I think Keith made two very important points.
1. Alberta is just different than BC and Eastern Canada. It is more than any specific policy or grievance.
2. The original BNA might have allowed the type of federalism that would allow Alberta to flourish inside Canada, but we have strayed so far from that and gotten so centralized that there is no set of policy changes that would help that would be agreed to by the federal government and other provinces to fix it.
As a non-Albertan, I would be sad to see them go, and worse off, but would wish them well if they make the decision.
Your guest made some very convincing arguments. I'm in rural southwestern Ontario, and I can tell you that the people who live around here are more like the Alberta folks than the people who seem to call the shots. Politics in Canada is so dominated by Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal that the rest of us get labelled right along with them. I don't see the issue so much as "West vs the rest", I see it more as the classic rural/urban divide. With the exception of the Maritimes; I can't figure out why those people are so slavishly devoted to the Liberal party.
One of the core parts of this is to achieve proper recognition and respect for everything Alberta does for the rest of the country. Alberta is the 21st century Ontario in that it is the economic driver of Canada and it donates (under threat and duress) massive amounts of its properly earned money to the rest of Canada (Quebec and the east) who then use it to hobble and criticize the core values and products that are in point of fact generating the money used to support the critics. I can only see two ways that Alberta will ever be respected for its hard work; either it separates, and it will do just fine as a separate country, or this forces the opening of the Constitution and a realignment of the Senate and House of Commons to reflect current Canada, including getting fully rid of the "transfer payments" which have long outlived their usefulness. There is no way that PEI, a tiny province of 160,000 people should have 4 Senators and 4 MPs. In 1867 it held some strategic position and there was no Canada west of "Upper Canada" so it had an arguably useful place. Today it is known for red sand and, to some people, spuds. Not much else. Yet it swings the heaviest hammer in Confederation. That needs to be fixed as does the same over representation of other provinces AND the Senate needs to be turned into something actually useful, not just another sink for Alberta's cash and a retirement perk for loyalists to which ever party happens to be in power in Ottawa. It's not at all hard to understand why Alberta NEEDS to vote to empower Danielle Smith up to and including separation as long as we have a Liberal Government in Ottawa that is wasting $billions and Alberta is not being listened to and give the things they are reasonably asking for.
A 'Yes' vote is Canada's last chance. A 'Yes' vote would probably require Constitutional reform. For one thing, Alberta gets only 6 Senators! That's crazy!
Bruce, the truth is that a "yes" vote by we in Alberta may be ROC's last chance but I cannot believe that they would be smart enough to seize that chance. Simply put, ROC is far too greedy, both economically and politically, to back off enough from the way that they have disadvantaged Alberta since our founding and they will not stop.
Hi Brian. As a western Canadian, your comment about disagreeing with your guest needs to be backed up with more information on what exactly you disagree with. When he said “we are different” in the west from eastern Canadians, I understand what he is saying. I assume you can’t relate to this comment either. Maybe next time if you are going to comment on whether you agree or disagree with someone you interview, you help your subscribers understand what is behind your stated judgements.